IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
No. 5 of 2008()
1. THE TRAVANCORE DEVASWOM BOARD,
... Petitioner
Vs
1. THE DEPUTY EXAMINER,
... Respondent
For Petitioner :SRI.K.N.VENUGOPALA PANICKER, SC, TDB
For Respondent : No Appearance
The Hon'ble MR. Justice P.R.RAMAN
The Hon'ble MR. Justice V.K.MOHANAN
Dated :29/01/2008
O R D E R
P.R.RAMAN & V.K.MOHANAN, JJ.
-------------------------------
D.B.A.NO.5 OF 2008
(In the matter of approval of sanction for finalisation
of tenders with regard to Vedi Vazhivadu in connection with
Mandalam Makaravilakku for the year 1183 M.E. in Pandalam
Valiyakoikkal Devaswom of Aranmula group)
--------------------------------
Dated this the 29th day of January, 2008
O
R D E R
Raman, J.
This is an application seeking sanction and approval for
finalisation of the auction by the Valiakoikkal Devaswom of Aranmula
Group in respect of Vedi Vazhivadu in connection with Mandalam-
Makaravilakku for the year 1183 M.E. In the affidavit filed by the
Secretary-in-charge of the Board in support of the DBA it is averred
that though tenders were invited for the Vedi Vazhivadu and notices
inviting such tenders were published four times as in the previous
occasion, there was nobody to tender or bid in the auction. A
newspaper publication was also given in Mathrubhumi daily dated
19/9/2007. Still there was nobody to submit any tender. Again a notice
was published inviting tenders and the auction was fixed to be held on
5/10/2007 and again on 25/10/2007 and again on 5/11/2007. The bid
amount was only Rs.1,40,101/- which is certainly less than the
previous year's amount. The fact that steps were taken by the
-2-
DBA.No.5/2008
authorities for invitation of the tender and that there was no tender
submitted in spite of paper publication effected would show that
sufficient interested persons were not available to submit tender. In the
factual situation, we ratify the auction as sought for.
DBA is closed.
P.R.RAMAN,
Judge.
V.K.MOHANAN,
Judge.
kcv.
? IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
+WP(Crl) No. 22 of 2008(S)
#1. THOMAS PAPPACHAN @ BIJU, S/O.PAPPACHAN
... Petitioner
Vs
$1. THE CIRCLE INSPECTOR OF POLICE,
... Respondent
2. THE SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE,
3. SALY BOBAN, MANKARA HOUSE,
! For Petitioner :SRI.LATHEESH SEBASTIAN
^ For Respondent :SRI.P.SANTHALINGAM
*Coram
The Hon'ble MR. Justice P.R.RAMAN
The Hon'ble MR. Justice V.K.MOHANAN
% Dated :29/01/2008
: O R D E R
P.R.RAMAN & V.K.MOHANAN, JJ.
——————————-
W.P.(Crl)NO.22 OF 2008
——————————–
Dated this the 29th day of January, 2008
JUDGMENT
Raman, J.
Petitioner, who is the father of Alina Mary Thomas, the alleged
detenue, has filed this writ petition for issuance of a writ of habeas corpus
to produce the alleged detenue, aged 7 years before this Court. He alleges
that his child is under the illegal custody of the 3rd respondent, who is the
elder sister of his wife. By an interim order dated 21/1/2008 the custody of
the alleged detenu was temporarily given to the petitioner-father. The
petitioner-father is employed abroad and he has come to Kerala and has
filed this writ petition. During the pendency of this proceeding both the
parties have jointly filed a compromise petition (I.A.No.1174/2008) settling
out the terms under which the compromise is arrived at. Both the parties
pray that the compromise be recorded and orders passed in terms of the
compromise.
2. We have considered the terms of the compromise. Considering the
fact that the petitioner is the natural guardian of the minor girl and that the
his wife is no more, the terms of the compromise is found to be fair,
-2-
W.P.(Crl.)22/2008
reasonable and hence accepted. Accordingly, the compromise is recorded.
The custody of the child is given to the petitioner-father. The passport
surrendered before this Court shall be returned to the petitioner through his
counsel, after obtaining proper receipt.
Writ Petition is disposed of in terms of the compromise. Compromise
Petition (I.A.No.1174/2008) shall be annexed with this judgment.
P.R.RAMAN,
Judge.
V.K.MOHANAN,
Judge.
kcv.